NRL to trial reduced scrums

[Whippet13]

Amongst other changes:

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/sep/22/nrl-to-trial-drastic-rule-changes-in-final-round-of-2020-season

Scrums will only be for knock-on's.

Offside will be a re-start is.

Not a fan of the video review on every referee-awarded try, erodes the referee's authority too far in my view as it actually takes an element of running the game out of his control.

Be interesting to see what impact the scrum change in particular has on our own trial of it, suspect me may go the same way next year.

[DavidM]

Does that mean if the ref/ touchies think it’s a try then they give it , and the VR just quietly reviews it in the background without anyone knowing before the goal kick ? If so that would be a very positive step because things have become very ridiculous with referrals ... and since a touchie made an error they’ve pretty much decided not to give anything which is just silly and a terrible mindset .

[Tommygilf]

I believe they've also introduced a rule where scrums have to have "nominated forwards" in, rather than the scenario we often see now where back rowers are put in the defensive line

[DavidM]

7 minutes ago, Whippet13 said:

erodes the referee's authority too far in my view as it actually takes an element of running the game out of his control.

I’m afraid the on field officials have willingly let the running of the game be taken out of their control . Gerrard Sutton has done 400 games and all the top matches but look at his lack of decision making . Filter that down to the rest . Our officials here definitely make more of their own calls 

[Rupert Prince]

It all seems stupid to me. 

Suppose it's 30 secs to go in the GF and you are losing by 1 point and are 3 yards out with 6 tackles to go and the defence go off side.  No penalty, just a restart.  You get your extra tackle and you fail to score. 

[Hela Wigmen]

Haven’t missed them at all. Let them go. 

[DavidM]

6 minutes ago, Rupert Prince said:

It all seems stupid to me. 

Suppose it's 30 secs to go in the GF and you are losing by 1 point and are 3 yards out with 6 tackles to go and the defence go off side.  No penalty, just a restart.  You get your extra tackle and you fail to score. 

I think this has been a valid issue from the outset of this . Teams back their defence , willingly giving away set restarts or rushing up from scrums . In the play offs there’ll be tight games where you’d like to go for goal . I’ve always thought in the 20 that option should be there 

[unapologetic pedant]

33 minutes ago, Whippet13 said:

Amongst other changes:

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/sep/22/nrl-to-trial-drastic-rule-changes-in-final-round-of-2020-season

Scrums will only be for knock-on's.

Offside will be a re-start is.

Not a fan of the video review on every referee-awarded try, erodes the referee's authority too far in my view as it actually takes an element of running the game out of his control.

Be interesting to see what impact the scrum change in particular has on our own trial of it, suspect me may go the same way next year.

Annoyingly I`ve just gone to the bother of finding the original "to scrum or not to scrum" thread to address the scrum part of these changes before this was posted.

[unapologetic pedant]

26 minutes ago, Rupert Prince said:

It all seems stupid to me. 

Suppose it's 30 secs to go in the GF and you are losing by 1 point and are 3 yards out with 6 tackles to go and the defence go off side.  No penalty, just a restart.  You get your extra tackle and you fail to score. 

I think in this scenario the ref would give the penalty, as they currently do for a ruck infringement. The officials just have to sum up all the circumstances to determine the most appropriate sanction.

[Dave T]

47 minutes ago, DavidM said:

Does that mean if the ref/ touchies think it’s a try then they give it , and the VR just quietly reviews it in the background without anyone knowing before the goal kick ? If so that would be a very positive step because things have become very ridiculous with referrals ... and since a touchie made an error they’ve pretty much decided not to give anything which is just silly and a terrible mindset .

Sounds awful. You can't celebrate really until the vr has given the try (by not disallowing it). It's a weird idea. 

[Dunbar]

45 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

I believe they've also introduced a rule where scrums have to have "nominated forwards" in, rather than the scenario we often see now where back rowers are put in the defensive line

I like this part of the changes.  Only players designated as forwards pre-match will be able to pack in scrums, as well as those who replace them on the interchange.

Of course the NRL benefits from players taking to the field in jerseys numbered 1 to 17 which helps in this situation.

I have said it before but it is massive bug bear of mine where we use player numbers and not positional numbers... how on earth is someone supposed to understand the positions on the park and their responsibilities if they don't know who is playing in what position... it's almost as if we are deliberately trying to put off new people to the game and make it impossible for them to learn it.

[DavidM]

5 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Sounds awful. You can't celebrate really until the vr has given the try (by not disallowing it). It's a weird idea. 

Mmm I’d have to see this in action to grasp what it means 

[Tommygilf]

1 minute ago, Dunbar said:

I like this part of the changes.  Only players designated as forwards pre-match will be able to pack in scrums, as well as those who replace them on the interchange.

Of course the NRL benefits from players taking to the field in jerseys numbered 1 to 17 which helps in this situation.

I have said it before but it is massive bug bear of mine where we use player numbers and not positional numbers... how on earth is someone supposed to understand the positions on the park and their responsibilities if they don't know who is playing in what position... it's almost as if we are deliberately trying to put off new people to the game and make it impossible for them to learn it.

Yeah I agree its a good change and could be the only thing that could save the scrum in RL.

I like 1-17 as I feel it adds real weight to making a position in a side yours, though I also like names on the back too.

[Man of Kent]

Good changes re the scrum and I'd expect them to be adopted permanently & Super League/RFL to follow.

Scrums after a kick to touch are an anachronism. 

[DavidM]

4 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

I like this part of the changes.  Only players designated as forwards pre-match will be able to pack in scrums, as well as those who replace them on the interchange.

Of course the NRL benefits from players taking to the field in jerseys numbered 1 to 17 which helps in this situation.

I have said it before but it is massive bug bear of mine where we use player numbers and not positional numbers... how on earth is someone supposed to understand the positions on the park and their responsibilities if they don't know who is playing in what position... it's almost as if we are deliberately trying to put off new people to the game and make it impossible for them to learn it.

Totally agree . 1-17 should be an absolute given , and forwards pack in scrums . Both nobrainers 

[Dave T]

6 minutes ago, DavidM said:

Mmm I’d have to see this in action to grasp what it means 

I suppose my point is that if you know it is being reviewed, then it can be disallowed at any time. It hasn't officially been given. 

[DavidM]

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

I suppose my point is that if you know it is being reviewed, then it can be disallowed at any time. It hasn't officially been given. 

Indeed . I’d scrap the whole thing and have match officials officiating but they’re you go 

[The Rocket]

1 hour ago, Man of Kent said:

Good changes re the scrum and I'd expect them to be adopted permanently & Super League/RFL to follow.

Scrums after a kick to touch are an anachronism. 

Well done MOK, I think that was the very last thing you said on ` To Scrum or Not to Scrum` in the very last post.

Just shows someone at NRL HQ must have been reading that thread and thought ###### it and skipped to the end and thought that`s not a bad idea. I`ll take it !

[Man of Kent]

2 minutes ago, The Rocket said:

Well done MOK, I think that was the very last thing you said on ` To Scrum or Not to Scrum` in the very last post.

Just shows someone at NRL HQ must have been reading that thread and thought ###### it and skipped to the end and thought that`s not a bad idea. I`ll take it !

Hehe. Not claiming any credit!

Hopefully they'll eventually go further and introduce optional scrums. Haven't looked at the stats but knock-ons seem more prevalent in the British game (possibly due to colder/wetter climate).

After this season of no scrums at all, the umpteenth knock-on scrum on a chilly, damp February evening will be tiresome. 

[Rupert Prince]

2 hours ago, Dunbar said:

I like this part of the changes.  Only players designated as forwards pre-match will be able to pack in scrums, as well as those who replace them on the interchange.

Of course the NRL benefits from players taking to the field in jerseys numbered 1 to 17 which helps in this situation.

I have said it before but it is massive bug bear of mine where we use player numbers and not positional numbers... how on earth is someone supposed to understand the positions on the park and their responsibilities if they don't know who is playing in what position... it's almost as if we are deliberately trying to put off new people to the game and make it impossible for them to learn it.

That's a fair point, but I do not see why the penalty cannot be given any way, any time.  A penalty can be given when ever the ref gives one and defender can take a kick or take a tap.  The NRL fiddling with scrum rules is meaningless.

All these rules are quite pathetic.

[The Rocket]

1 hour ago, Rupert Prince said:

That's a fair point, but I do not see why the penalty cannot be given any way, any time.  A penalty can be given when ever the ref gives one and defender can take a kick or take a tap.  The NRL fiddling with scrum rules is meaningless.

All these rules are quite pathetic.

What if when the six-again bell goes or the ref signals six-again the Captain of the attacking team has the right to halt play to go for the goal, only goal and not tap restart.

I don`t mind the video ref checking the try while the kicker is lining up though, all that mucking around watching endless replays is very tiresome, and then the kick. If it is no try they call the conversion off and show on the big screen why from the appropriate camera shot, instead of wading through every bloody shot ad nauseum like we get now.

[graveyard johnny]

i doubt i would try and take new fans to a game now- its become so ru type technical- even i dont know whats going on 

[Bleep1673]

NOOOOO! Don't do it, Australian covid-19 is worse than anywhere in Europe.

Actually, if a few of the top forward infect each other, it might give England a chance at the next WC. Yeah, NRL, go for full scrums.

[Tommygilf]

3 minutes ago, Saint 1 said:

This seems like a solution to a non-problem for me. If back rowers are in the defensive line, attacking teams have every opportunity to take advantage of that.

Sounds good in principle but not true in reality.

[Tommygilf]

29 minutes ago, Saint 1 said:

Then surely the issue is risk averse coaches rather than who is in or out of the scrums? All this is going to do is mean you're attacking against a team with a fullback defending on the wing instead of attacking against a backrower. 

I suppose it means you'll have a set of backs directly attacking another set of backs which is rare in modern Rugby League. Perhaps it will encourage more inventive attacking scrum plays, perhaps teams might be more inclined to carry a spare back on the bench as opposed to another forward. Who knows but I'm excited to see it.

Also, defending on the wing can be awful, you tread a fine line between being the last defender and been left out at sea.